Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
14838
|
Posted - 2017.04.01 14:30:52 -
[1] - Quote
Hello everyone and happy Saturday!
Today I'm here to start collecting community feedback on a potential package of missile balance tweaks. These changes aren't confirmed yet and don't even have a release date, but if we do decide to go forward with them they would potentially arrive sometime in the summer.
The goal of these changes is to help improve the balance between the cruiser-sized missile systems and make the choice of what missiles to fit more interesting. We have also been hearing from you folks that Rapid Light Missiles are continuing to feel quite oppressive in their extremely strong combination of burst dps, range and application.
Here's the package of changes we are considering at this time:
- Increase Rapid Light and Rapid Heavy launcher reload time from 35s to 40s (~4% sustained dps reduction with no burst damage reduction). This change would reset the rapid launcher reload time back to the original values from when they were first converted to a burst damage system. It is a slight reduction to sustained dps while not impacting burst damage
- Change ship missile range bonuses to not apply to undersize missiles
- This would mean that the following ships would have their range bonuses only apply to Heavy and Heavy Assault Missiles: Orthrus, Caracal, Cerberus, Onyx, Osprey Navy Issue, Cyclone, Drake, Drake Navy Issue
- The Barghest range bonus would also be changed to only impact Cruise Missiles and Torpedoes
- The Mordu flight time reduction would also no longer apply to undersized missiles
- This change would only affect range bonuses (missile velocity and missile flight time) not damage bonuses
- Increase all Heavy Missile damage by 5.6%. This would be a general buff to HMLs and more than compensate for the longer reload time on RHMLs leading to a slight buff for them as well.
As I mentioned above we don't have a proposed release date for these changes yet but we want to start gathering community feedback and get the discussion started. Thanks and happy Saturday!
Game Designer | Team Five-0
Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
|
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
14838
|
Posted - 2017.04.01 14:32:15 -
[2] - Quote
Reserved
Game Designer | Team Five-0
Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
|
|
GENT
Naliao Inc. Test Alliance Please Ignore
40
|
Posted - 2017.04.01 14:36:56 -
[3] - Quote
HAhahahha good one.
Watch my stream on twitch for small gang PVP and Exploration content in 0.0
|
Suitonia
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
813
|
Posted - 2017.04.01 14:40:13 -
[4] - Quote
Th e problem is the burst damage killing most attack cruisers and similar anti support options while having twice the EHP as those options, please reduce the reload time to 30 seconds but reduce the clip size to 17 instead for T2. This retains almost identical Dps to now but allows ships like the rail Thorax, stabber, omen and other anti support ships to survive a reload.
Also, please, please consider increasing the fittings because the main issue with rapid light ships right now is they can fit absolutely everything with no sacrifice, mid to long cruiser sniper ranges, close range turret burst DPS, with high EHP. Increasing the reload time won't address any of this. Most people ping and reload while in Warp in bigger fights.
Contributer to Eve is Easy:
https://www.youtube.com/user/eveiseasy/videos
Solo PvP is possible with a 20 day old character! :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvOB4KXYk-o
|
CtrlFreak
V0LTA WE FORM V0LTA
23
|
Posted - 2017.04.01 14:42:01 -
[5] - Quote
1st april. I can only assume this is fake. No more ships would use rapid light anymore with these change, and wtf barghest without rapid heavy? |
May'n Nome
General Quarters Inc. Safeties Set To Red
35
|
Posted - 2017.04.01 14:43:04 -
[6] - Quote
GENT wrote:HAhahahha good one.
I actually don't think this is a joke.
Badly timed release of this information as no one will believe it? Yes.
Joke? Nope.
I can already tell you a potential problem right off the bat. Removing the bonuses for RLMLs and RHMLs from certain ships will screw up doctrines across the board. I fear that this will render these weapons useless; unless there is a reduction to their fitting costs to allow them to fit on Destroyer and Battlecruiser Hulls (with applicable bonuses to those hulls). I pick up on the fact the Corax is perceived by the playerbase to be underutilized. RLML Corax could become a thing as well as RHML Drakes.
"Threefold is the time's pace: the future comes not in haste, the present is gone arrow fast, eternally still remains the past."
|
Gorski Car
714
|
Posted - 2017.04.01 14:47:12 -
[7] - Quote
Increase all Heavy Missile damage by 5.6%
lmao
Collect this post
|
Minty Aroma
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
75
|
Posted - 2017.04.01 14:49:41 -
[8] - Quote
I think he got a few of you with that! The best April fools jokes are subtle enough to possibly be real as opposed to the outrageous.
Still though, would be nice to have a heavy missile buff although for application so they can apply to cruiser sized targets more effectively. |
ISD Max Trix
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
1710
|
Posted - 2017.04.01 14:50:31 -
[9] - Quote
Having tested these changes out, this seems like a great idea.
ISD Max Trix
Lieutenant
Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Interstellar Services Department
|
GENT
Naliao Inc. Test Alliance Please Ignore
41
|
Posted - 2017.04.01 14:51:28 -
[10] - Quote
May'n Nome wrote:GENT wrote:HAhahahha good one. I actually don't think this is a joke. Badly timed release of this information as no one will believe it? Yes. Joke? Nope. I can already tell you a potential problem right off the bat. Removing the bonuses for RLMLs and RHMLs from certain ships will screw up doctrines across the board. I fear that this will render these weapons useless; unless there is a reduction to their fitting costs to allow them to fit on Destroyer and Battlecruiser Hulls (with applicable bonuses to those hulls). I pick up on the fact the Corax is perceived by the playerbase to be underutilized. RLML Corax could become a thing as well as RHML Drakes.
I duno Fozzie is pretty trolly, and I think he knows this would be a bad change.
Watch my stream on twitch for small gang PVP and Exploration content in 0.0
|
|
Aernir Ridley
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
9
|
Posted - 2017.04.01 14:53:39 -
[11] - Quote
Assuming that this isn't an April Fools joke, if you're going to nerf rapid launcher range then maybe buffing Heavy Assault Missile Range would be a good way to promote some new gameplay around it. They're pretty underused atm because of their pitiful range, but with a small to moderate range bonus they could replace RLMLs on some ships.
"For most people, the sky's the limit... For those who love aviation, the sky, is home."
-Cheers! :D
|
Tikktokk Tokkzikk
V0LTA WE FORM V0LTA
345
|
Posted - 2017.04.01 14:55:39 -
[12] - Quote
I'd rather keep rapids like they are now, but increase the powergrid required to be much higher. This would keep rapid lights as arguably the strongest missile system, but require serious fitting sacrifices. For example, if T2 RLMLs required 140PG instead of 77PG, a Caracal would only be able to fit one LSE with two ancil rigs, which would reduce its EHP by 9k. This would give rapids a real drawback to go with their amazing DPS and versatility. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
1284
|
Posted - 2017.04.01 15:02:40 -
[13] - Quote
please seriously consider deleting rapid launchers. look at the stats on a RLML cruiser, then ask yourself what the point of T1 destroyers is |
aria Yatolila
Literally The Worst Community
76
|
Posted - 2017.04.01 15:06:07 -
[14] - Quote
Increase all Heavy Missile damage by 5.6%
GÖÑ
Lady Yatolila, retainer of her Lady Kadesh and Khanid Royal House
|
Henry Plantgenet
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
199
|
Posted - 2017.04.01 15:10:46 -
[15] - Quote
What would this do for oversized missile launchers? Will the reload bonus of the jackdaw still affect my rapid light missile launchers on said hull? |
Kendarr
Zebra Corp Goonswarm Federation
62
|
Posted - 2017.04.01 15:14:14 -
[16] - Quote
Yes, finally the ******* RLML nurf!
please buff HML application not damage and also buff the range of HAMs a tiny bit please
Zebra-Corp
|
Capqu
ElitistOps Pandemic Legion
1304
|
Posted - 2017.04.01 15:23:21 -
[17] - Quote
a pretty good change re: nerfing rapid lights; however i think heavies need help in a different department than raw damage. they are currently destroyed by a single smartbomb regardless of how they are grouped, and you don't need to be particularly skilled to do it either. here's me just turning on my smarties and destroying torps: http://i.imgur.com/5x7IDBP.gif note that grouping does not matter as the missiles take 100% increased damage for every missile added beyond the first.
another thing i'd ask while you're tweaking medium missiles, would it be possible for an extra launcher on the cyclone? it is currently massively underpowered in the firepower department, and only really has a slight speed advantage to show for it. it has only 6.66 launchers where its sister ships [drake, brutix, hurricane, harbinger] all have 9. an extra launcher would bring it up to 8 launchers, and allow it to join the ferox which also has 8.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPntjTPWgKE
|
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc Tactical-Retreat
2109
|
Posted - 2017.04.01 15:31:12 -
[18] - Quote
Awful.
Meanwhile you have stuff like live-unboarding into neutral bowheads in war time, neutral risk-free command ships, machariels with selectable damage type, immunity to neut and cruiser warp and subwarp speed.
But suure, go after RHML lol.
Signature Tanking Best Tanking
[Ex-F] CEO - Eve-guides.fr
Ultimate Citadel Guide - 2016 EVE Career Chart
|
aria Yatolila
Literally The Worst Community
76
|
Posted - 2017.04.01 15:37:44 -
[19] - Quote
Altrue wrote: machariels with selectable damage type
Tell me more
Lady Yatolila, retainer of her Lady Kadesh and Khanid Royal House
|
The Slayer
Hole Violence Goonswarm Federation
342
|
Posted - 2017.04.01 15:39:21 -
[20] - Quote
Gotta say on the believabilily scale this April fools ranks about a 4/10, not even you could be stupid enough to think this is a good idea Fozziewick. |
|
Ayallah
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
880
|
Posted - 2017.04.01 15:45:35 -
[21] - Quote
Nerfing the range will leave them still dangerous but not as overpowering so +1 to that.
Still concerned how they make HAM's worthless though
As strength goes.
|
Veishe
Rubbish
3
|
Posted - 2017.04.01 15:50:33 -
[22] - Quote
I think this is April fool, but seriously just nerf RLML's clip size, not reload time or missile range lol
The problem is simple.
RLML is much better than HML/HAM when even shooting cruisers, and too oppressive when vs small ships; cause It has too much burst dps.
Nerfing missile range will be make Caracal can't hit 1 MWD frig so RLML will be useless dead weapon; so bad nerf. Nerfing reload time will be not primary solution; cause It has same burst dps and the RLML cancer is due to burst dps.
Just nerf clip size, and buff HML and HAM, Cruise missile plz. |
Ripard Teg
Ice Fire Warriors Shadow Cartel
1338
|
Posted - 2017.04.01 15:55:10 -
[23] - Quote
Assuming this is not an April Fool's Day joke, this is a terrible idea.
The whole point to giving missile ships light missile bonuses in the first place is the fact that they were running dead last by race in terms of damage application in a screen or light combat role where such ships -- particularly the Caracal -- are used most frequently. We're not exactly talking about a DPS powerhouse on its best day, perhaps 250 or 275, which you propose to reduce by increasing the reload time. If you're looking to adjust, that adjustment alone should meet your goals without removing the ammo bonus as well.
By removing the ammo bonus as well, you push the Caracal back to 150 DPS with very bad application, which you propose to increase by 4%... to 160 DPS, or 150 DPS and very poor range. This compares to the Omen, which has 280 DPS without its drones and much superior application, then the Thorax/Vexor at 250 DPS or so. Even the Minmatar options will be superior to the Caracal. You're in essence proposing to put a whole set of doctrines right out of business and I don't see a good compelling reason why and you don't state one.
If you're looking to work on a small/medium weapons system, how about working on a small/medium weapons system that is clearly and obviously completely broken: autocannons?
aka Jester, who apparently was once Deemed Worthy To Wield The Banhammer to good effect.
|
Capqu
ElitistOps Pandemic Legion
1305
|
Posted - 2017.04.01 15:55:42 -
[24] - Quote
**** i hate april the 1st
i'd be amazed if this was actually a joke but i don't think it is so
please give heavy+ missiles 4x their current ehp
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPntjTPWgKE
|
Asher Elias
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
28
|
Posted - 2017.04.01 15:56:22 -
[25] - Quote
Rapid heavies do not need a range nerf. As someone who has attempted a barghest fleet recently I can tell you the only sensible way to fit them is rapid heavies. I know cruise missiles being no good for PVP is outside the scope of this change but removing the range bonus on the barghest RHML setup is a pretty huge nerf.
I also don't think people really grasp how big a nerf the range removal is to rapid lights either, but that one is more debatable in my mind. The orthrus and osprey navy in particular will be hit hard by it because you'll remove their main defense if you remove range control. I'm worried these ships would become obsolescent.
I'd personally like to see a change that lowered the burst of RLML such as a less shots per reload. Even something like a double change of lowering reload time and lowering the clip would smooth out the damage more and address some of the burst concerns. |
Captain Campion
Campion Corp.
56
|
Posted - 2017.04.01 15:58:02 -
[26] - Quote
I wrote my thoughts before reading your proposal: - Light missile range is too strong. Propose about 30km. - RLML dps is too strong. Propose 10% reduction in ROF. - HAM range is too short. Should not be shorter than light missiles. - HML explosion radius is too big. Propose 10% reduction.
|
Planet 6
Know your Role League of Unaligned Master Pilots
14
|
Posted - 2017.04.01 15:58:27 -
[27] - Quote
there is a reason why nobody uses cruise and torps on a barghest... |
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
3111
|
Posted - 2017.04.01 16:08:05 -
[28] - Quote
ProTip: With a longer reload time, you'll have more time to repair the heat damage to your RLMLs.
If you aren't overheating your RLMLs and repairing during the long reloads, you're doing it wrong.
Relatively Notorious By Association
My Many Misadventures
I predicted FAUXs
|
Methea Selenis
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
5
|
Posted - 2017.04.01 16:11:28 -
[29] - Quote
Makes me really sad that this could be both an April Fool joke and a serious idea. It highlights the state of RLML and the level of expectations we all have from PvP balance changes.
Please don't do that, there are so much bad ideas there... While no doubt opressive nobody thinks the kiting RLML meta should completely disappear (which will be the case if you remove the ship bonuses that influence LM range). Please do it like you did for T3Ds the nerf was overall well-thought and they are now still strong and usefull but require actual piloting and fitting sacrifices. Please take the same approach for RLML cruisers, make a focus group and let people discuss and explain to you the consequences of different options.
RLML are support-pawn-boats, that would be totally fine if they would not be able at the same time to be as tanky as brawly cruisers and kill them within one burst. As many above I'd rather see the clip being smaller and powergid requirement higher forcing to drop tank and be as kiters should be : easy kills when scrammed fast. |
Sanai Nobuseri
Alcoholocaust. Test Alliance Please Ignore
30
|
Posted - 2017.04.01 16:20:05 -
[30] - Quote
Thank you CCP for making missile boats which are already nearly worthless that much more worthless. In a meta which only supports massive small roaming cheap ships or massive groups of supers taking out the only reasonable counter to the former is a fantastic idea. While your at it, please remove the drake navy issue and the caracal navy issue from the game entirely as they are essentially just vanity items now.
Edit: Instead of nerfing the hell out of missiles why dont you actually make defender missiles great again? Not the anti bomber bs but the real defender missiles. Most cruiser hulls have a utility slot they can stick an anti missile defender in that can mitigate Rapid light missile dps. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |